Vimala Devi v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20236 of 2018 ====================================================== Vimala Devi W/o Birendra Sah, resident of Village- Bamhaur, P.S.- Shiv Sagar, District- Rohtas Sasaram.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union Of India and Ors 2.

The Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways Department, Government of India, New Delhi.

3.

The Project Director, National Highways Authority of India, Rohtas Sasaram.

4.

The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Road Construction Department, Bihar, Patna.

5.

The Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 6.

The District Magistrate, Rohtas Sasaram.

7.

The Competent Authority cum District Land Acquisition Officer, Rohtas Sasaram.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Binod Murari Mishra, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar, AC to AAG-11 For the NHAI :

Dr. Maurya Vijay Chandra, Adv.

Mr. Gaurav Govinda, Adv.

Ms. Ankita Kumari, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 23-09-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The present application has been preferred for the following relief(s):

(i) for direction to the respondent concerned to pay the compensation to the petitioner on the basis of correct measurement as well as on the basis of which they have paid to others in course of the same acquisition, along with interest

Patna High Court CWJC No.20236 of 2018(2) dt.23-09-2025 2/2 over the said amount;

(ii) for any other relief/reliefs for which the petitioner is found entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. After some argument, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he be allowed to approach the appropriate authority/Arbitrator for the redressal of the grievance, there has been delay as was pursuing the matter before the Patna High Court.

4. In that background, the writ petition is disposed of allowing the petitioner that if a proper petition is preferred in next eight weeks, the concerned authority shall see to it that the matter was pending before this Court for seven years and ensure that the same is decided on merit at an earliest.

5. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U